What more is there to say. Its already been said in post 10. There is special ops in most all branches of government agencies not just the military. So there it is, there is exceptions.
Drones used over Austin bomber's house.
- Thread starter GMack
- Start date
What more is there to say. Its already been said in post 10. There is special ops in most all branches of government agencies not just the military. So there it is, there is exceptions.
Just stating that there may be "exceptions" doesn't demonstrate anything. And the general term "Special Ops" does not mean that applicable laws are not followed. The State and Federal agencies that I'm familiar with follow Federal regulations and so, while they may be able to get broader COAs than would be granted to private companies or individuals, unless you are aware of specific examples then I think that you are mistaken.
Think as you wish, unless your an authorized person or very good acquaintance with one or more, you wont know anything about any of these people or agencies actions and it appears your not. And I hope to god anyone familiar with or envolved in such "specific examples" would keep things the way they are- unknown.
And you said it yourself-
Sounds like your saying the same thing as I am. If they can get broader COAs than anyone else, thats another example they dont have the same rules we do.
Moving on- looks like there is no explanation coming from BigA as to how my post was borderline personal.
And you said it yourself-
Sounds like your saying the same thing as I am. If they can get broader COAs than anyone else, thats another example they dont have the same rules we do.
Moving on- looks like there is no explanation coming from BigA as to how my post was borderline personal.
Your first statement is certainly ironic. What's an "authorized person"? It sounds to me that you may have been watching too many TV shows. And no, I'm not saying the same thing as you were - you were arguing that they don't either need to follow Part 107 or get COAs. I'm saying that in my experience they do exactly that. Granting a broader COA is not the same as exempting from the law - COAs are approved under the law. Also - if you are so concerned at preserving the secrecy of these "black" agency activities - why did you mention them in the first place?
FARs have long been given some "leeway" by way of WAIVERS. The FAA reviews and approves/denies/tweaks each and every WAIVER request one at a time. FAR are not hard and fast and if someone is given a broader COA than someone else it's because their mission is justified and they've met safety criteria to prove to the FAA they can carry out the mission "outside of FARS" in a safe and efficient manner.
Your ramblings make less and less sense the further you try to explain them.
Anyone can submit a request for WAIVER regardless of Agency affiliation. Federal, State, and local agencies submit for and get approved for COAs each and every day. Outside of a COA we all fly by the same rules set forth by the FAA.
